Forums

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

I missed the English Court of Appeal ruling last month refusing to grant an injunction to stop Private Eye from publishing details of a complaint against a former President of the Law Society, Michael Napier. According to The Times the ruling also clears the way for thousands of other cases each year against solicitors and barristers to be publicised, as well as findings by the legal ombudsmen who act as a last “court” of appeal.

One lawyer told The Times “This will be a free-for-all for complainants. Anyone aggrieved with his or her lawyer will be able to publicise details, whether the complaint was upheld or not — and the public will think there's no smoke without fire.”

I have some sympathy with this view but surely being open and making disciplinary rulings public when a complaint is upheld would be preferable and more balanced than the public relying on media stories?

0
comments:

About Me

As far as I'm aware this is the first blog aimed mainly at demystifying divorce and family law in Scotland. To avoid any doubt I am not a lawyer or any other professional working in this field. Fiona isn't my real name. I chose Princess Fiona as an avatar because she is very different from how she might first appear. Underneath the archetypal fairy tale princess persona Fiona is really very independent, resourceful and isn't afraid of engaging in combat.
Comments welcome.

Disclaimer

Whilst every effort will be taken to ensure the accuracy of the information, this blog is based on my thoughts and personal experiences so please don't treat anything in it as an alternative to professional advice.